RESEARCH REPORTON
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND POST DISASTERLIVELIHOOD RECOVERY PROGRAM IN JAPAN AND BANGLADESH

Submitted by

MD MUNIR CHOWDHURY,
VISITING RESEARCHER, ADRC
KOBE, JAPAN, MARCH, 2012

Disclaimer
This report was compiled by an ADRC visiting researcher (VR) from ADRC
member countries.
The views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect the views of theADRC. The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on themaps in the report also do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by
the ADRC.

PREFACE
Bangladesh is considered the most natural disaster prone country in Asia. Its coastal areas
are periodically hit by floods, cyclone, storm surges, tornados, river bank erosion. After theCatastrophic Cyclone SIDR in 2007 and AILA in 2009 it had severely damaged human life,
property and infrastructures in six coastal districts of Bangladesh. Most of the households inthat areas faces the hard times after losing their livelihoods. The livelihoods in the area andeven the entire local economy severely affected. Natural, financial, physical, social andhuman assets are all eroded, markets are disrupted, and these adverse effects can lead tothe virtual collapse of the economic and social environment. So, effective pre-disasterlivelihood planning and post-disaster livelihood recovery programs are needed to address
such risks. As livelihood security is strongly related to the disaster risk reduction (DRR),
Government of Bangladesh needs effective pre-disaster recovery planning, capacity building
and strong institutional support for implementing different livelihood programs in post natural
disaster recovery and reconstruction. The paper presents comparative analysis and some
findings of livelihood recovery program of Japan and Bangladesh which includes the predisaster and post disaster livelihood recovery planning and programs. Theoretical as well aspractical experiences on short, medium and long term post disaster livelihood recovery
program in Japan context and the tools and logistics used to overcome post disastersituation will enrich the knowledge and experiences of the researcher. In this regard the
inputs that can be generated from the research finding will help the Government of
Bangladesh for replicating in its own environment in combating disaster risk reduction.

Table of Contents

Pages

1. Introduction
1.1 Specific Aim
1.2 Research Methodology
1.3 Expected Result

07
08
08
08

2. Bangladesh National Disaster Context
2.1 Bangladesh DM History
2.1.1 GOB Vision
2.1.2 GOB Mission
2.1.3 Overall Objectives
2.2 GOB Capacity in Disaster Management
2.3 National Plan for Disaster Management
2.4 Strategic Focus Area of DM in Bangladesh
2.5 Line of Defence
2.6 Preparedness
2.6.1 NDRCC
2.6.2 DoRR
2.6.3 CPP
2.6.4 DMIC/N
2.7 National Priorities 2011-2020
2.8 Regional Priorities

09
10
11
11
11
11
12
12
13
14
14
14
14
14
14
14

3. Natural Disaster in Japan
3.1 Disaster Management System of Japan
3.2 Disaster Management Framework of Japan
3.3 Main contents of the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act

17
18
19
20

4. The Concept of Recovery Process
4.1 Principles of Recovery
4.2 Pre-Disaster Recovery Planning

21
21
21

5. Definition of Livelihood
5.1 Why Consider Livelihood in Recovery Process
5.2 Livelihood Assessment Tools and Standards
5.3 Employment and Livelihood

23
24
24
26

6. Bangladesh Recovery Plan and Program
6.1 Poverty- Disaster Interface
6.2 Natural Disaster Recovery Program
6.3 Ministry of Food & Disaster Management
6.4 Area of Social Protection
6.5 Types of Social Protection Program
6.6 Impacts of Social safety Nets
7. A Case Study of livelihood Recovery Program in Bangladesh
7.1 Major Emergency Relief by DMRD
7.2 Restoration of Livelihood
7.3 Repair of Damage Embankment
7.4 International Donor Assistance
7.5 Need and Priorities (Short-Term)
7.6 Need and Priorities (Long-Term)
7.7 Disaster Recovery Act/ Guidelines

27
27
29
30
30
31-32
33
35
35
35
35
36
37
38
38

Table of Contents

Pages

8. Constraints and Challenges

39

9. Disaster Victims livelihood Recovery Support System in Japan
9.1 Japanese Disaster Relief Act
9.1.1 Types of Relief Activities
9.1.2 Scope, Method, Time, Period of Activities
9.1.3 Compensation Payment
9.1.4 Compensation for Disability
9.1.5 Disaster Relief Loan
9.1.6 Responsibilities for Emergency Relief under Disaster Relief Act
9.1.7 Act of Support for Livelihood Recovery of Disaster victim 1998

40
41
41
41
42
42
43
43
43

10 A Case Study of Recovery Program of Japan10.1 Formulation of Kobe City Recovery Plan
10.2Kobe City Recovery Project10.3 Three Basic View points of Economic Recovery
10.4 Post Earthquake Livelihood Situation and Process of Recovery
10.5 Hanshin- Awaji Reconstruction Plan
10.6 Seven Elements of Life Recovery

44
45
46
46
47
48
49

11. Lesson Learned and Challenges49

12. Comparative Study of DM System & Recovery Program in Japan & Bangladesh

50- 51

13. Conclusion

52

14. Recommendation

53

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTAs the members of the Research Team, I extend sincere appreciation to the ADRC authority
and the Ministry of Food and Disaster Management, Disaster Management and Relief
Division, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for selecting me for the VR FY
2011 B programme and allow me to visit the Kobe, Japan with a view to sharing our
experiences and improving our performance in the field of Disaster Risk Reduction.
I would like to pay my sincere gratitude to Honorable Minister for Food and Disaster
Management of Bangladesh, Dr. Mohammed Abdur Razzak and Dr. M. Aslam Alam, present
Secretary, Disaster Management and Relief Division for providing guidance for undertaking
such an important research program. I also extend my deep appreciation to Mr. M. A Wajed,
Additional Secretary, Disaster Management & Relief Division for sharing his experiences in
preparing the Research Proposal. I would like to thank all the staff members of the ADRC for
providing me kind cooperation to conduct the successful research program. I am extremely
grateful to Mr. Kiyoshi Natori (Executive Director – ADRC) who guided me with his valuable
wisdom, knowledge and experience on disaster management. I would like to express mythanks and gratitude to Ms. Miki Kodama, Senior Researcher, ADRC whose constantguidance, meticulous and thoughtful advice and inputs for improving the research work
always guided me on research issues and given solutions to my problems instantly.
I deeply acknowledge the contribution of the officials from ADRC Mr. Ibaraki and Mr. Ono for
guiding me in a systematic and comprehensive way during my field visit outside Kobe andextending all out support for successful completion of the program.
I am extremely grateful to all the officials and members of the Japan Government andmembers from other International Organizations who dedicated their valuable time to me
and shared their profound knowledge and expertise for enriching me. I am ever grateful to
Ms. Tae Watanabe (Administrative Manager), Ms. Fujinaka and Ms. Kawaguchi guided withthe administrative matters and gave me a proper way to overcome all the administrative
matters. Also, I must extend my heartiest thanks to administrative staff members of ADRC
and Japanese Teacher Mr. Shoji Kawahara, for his valuable information and valuablesuggestions and spent for me in many ways during my stay in Japan. I would never hesitate
to thank my other VR members from Nepal, Mongolia and Thailand, who shared theirexperiences and supported me to create better group activities during my stay in Japan.

Last but not the least we must not forget to acknowledge our family Members who undertook
lots of pain during my long ten week stay in Kobe, Japan.

(Md. Munir Chowdhury)
Joint Secretary
Disaster Management and Relief Division
Ministry of Food and Disaster Management

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ADRC
BRAC
CPP
CCA
CFW
CDMP
DM
DRR
DMB
DMRD
DORR
DMIC
DLA
DRRO
ECNEC
EMMA
EU
EQ
FAO
FFW
GOB
GR
HEA
HLSA
ILO
IRP
ILIA
JICA
LAT
LB
LEGS
MoFDM
NDRCC
NGO
NHK
NPO
PIO
PDRP
REOPA
SOD
SLF
TR
UNDP
VR
VGF
VGD
WFP

: Asian Disaster Reduction Centre: Bangladesh Rural Advancement Centre: Cyclone Preparedness Program: Climate Change Adaptation: Cash for Work: Comprehensive Disaster Management Program: Disaster Management: Disaster Risk Reduction: Disaster Management Bureau: Disaster Management and Relief Division: Directorate of Relief & rehabilitation: Disaster Management Information centre: Detailed Livelihood Assessment: District Relief & Rehabilitation Officer: Executive Committee for National Economic Council: Emergency Market Mapping and Analysis Tool-Kit: European Union: Earthquake: Food and Agriculture Organization: Food For Work: Government of Bangladesh: Gratuitous Relief: Household Economy Approach: Household Livelihood Security Assessment: International Labour Organization: International Recovery Platform: Initial Livelihood Impact Appraisal: Japan International Cooperation Agency: Livelihood Assessment Tool-Kit: Livelihood Baseline: Livelihood Emergency Guidelines and Standard: Ministry of Food and Disaster Management: National Disaster Response Coordination Centre: Non- Government Organization: Nippon Hoso Kyokai: Non Profit Organization: Project Implementation Officer: Pre-Disaster Recovery Planning: Rural Employment Opportunity for Public Assests: Standing Order on Disaster: Sustainable Livelihood Framework: Test Relief: United Nation Development Program: Visiting Researcher: Vulnerable Group Feeding: Vulnerable Group Development: World Food Program1. INTRODUCTION
Restoration of the livelihoods after a big disaster has been increasingly recognised andaddressed by all key actors within disaster recovery process. More importantly, disaster
affected populations have greatly identified livelihoods as their greatest recovery priorities.
Recent different country experiences showed that people constantly emphasised the needto restore their livelihoods rather than receive relief.
Disasters have a dramatic impact on the lives of people not least on their sources of
livelihood and productive assets, they leave livelihoods shattered; houses, schools and otherpublic facilities flattened; bridges and road networks collapsed; the geography of the zone
sometimes transformed. The impact of disasters hinders the capacity of affected groups torecover in the short-term and rebuild back their assets, thus often condemning the survivors
to a long dependency on relief aid. In this context, helping protecting and rebuilding the
livelihoods of those vulnerable to disasters becomes an urgent priority. Support to therecovery of means of living in farming, fisheries, rational use of natural resources, wage
employment in primary and secondary sectors and services, small trade, micro- and small
enterprises in the formal or informal sector, etc. have to be started as soon as possible in theimmediate aftermath of a disaster. Assessing the impact of disasters on the livelihoods ofpeople and the capacity and opportunities for quick recovery and increased resilience tofuture events is an important part of the response to disasters. Yet current assessment
systems are often weak, uncoordinated and are not strongly linked to livelihood recovery
interventions.
Post disaster livelihood recovery plan or guidelines areprimarily
developed bypolicymakers, planners and implementer of local and national government interested or
engaged in facilitating a more responsive sustainable and risk reducing livelihood recovery.
In this context two major issues need to be considered are i ) Enabling livelihood protectionii) improving livelihood promotion. It is recognized that while comparison the livelihood
recovery plan or program of two countries there is no guarantee that the same activity will
generate similar results across the context. Cultural norms, socio-economic context, gender
relation and other factor will influence the process and outcome of any planned facilities.
Therefore, the analysis, suggestion or solution in the findings to be applied, adapt whereappropriate.
In order to improve understanding of the impact of disasters on livelihoods, livelihood
vulnerability, this research work has been carried out to analyzing and responding to theimpact of disasters on the livelihoods of people. It tries to find out the best way of livelihood
protection as well as improving livelihood promotion
1.1 Specific Aim of the research

To compare the Disaster Management System in Bangladesh and Japan

To gather knowledge & skills from the DM system in Japan especially the techniques ofpre-disaster livelihood recovery planning and post-disaster livelihood recovery program

To identify the sustainable recovery plan that leads to promote integrated livelihood
management system of Bangladesh

To identify the main component of the Japanese livelihood recovery and relief act 1998
and replicating important components of Japans disaster victims livelihood recovery
support system in BangladeshReplicating Japanese vast experience on DM in BangladeshPrepare recommendations for improvement of DRR in Bangladesh

1.2 Research MethodologyThe methodology of the research activities will be based on both primary andsecondary data, i.e. identifying and analyzing various governmental / International
policy, plans, act, documents, guide books, journals, seminar paper, web materials etc.

The study will be also enriched by various presentation organized by ADRC/ JICA/IRP,
field visits, sharing of experiences with the Central Government and the Local
Government officials.

After the completion of the research work a study report including the recommendation
would be prepared.

1.3 Expected Result
Data and information on prevailing disaster management and post disaster livelihood
recovery plan, policies, act and practices of Bangladesh and Japan will be collected andcompared between two countries. Some best practices of Japan which can be applicable for
Bangladesh will be recommended to government of Bangladesh.

Location of Bangladesh in South Asia

2. National Disaster Context•

Frequently hit by various natural disasters like Cyclones, Storm surges, Floods,
Tornadoes, Earthquakes, Droughts and other calamities.

•

Monsoon flooding is an annual occurrence shaping lives and livelihoods.

•

Almost 200 disaster events have occurred causing more than 500,000 deaths andleaving prolonged damage to livelihoods, infrastructure and the economy.

•

Climate change is likely to cause significant impact in the form of severe floods,
cyclones, droughts, sea level rise and salinity affecting agriculture, livelihoods,
natural systems, water supply, health etc.

•

The disaster vulnerable people demonstrates strong coping capacity to face thedisaster challenges.

•

Bangladesh is the country with complex geo-physical and environmental diversity•

Disaster is a regular phenomena. Living with risks (flood and cyclone) is the reality•

Over the years people of the country has developed their own indigenous coping
mechanism•

Strong social belongingness and cohesion among the neighborhoods•

Vibrant NGO sector•

GO-NGO/public–private partnership•

Strong support from the development partners

Disasters and Bangladesh
Major Hazards
FloodTropical Cyclone
Storm Surge
Tornado
River Bank
ErosionDrought
Earthquake
Arsenic
Fire

Major Disasters
Year Disaster Death
1970 Cyclone
300,000
1988 Flood
2,373
1988 Cyclone
5,7041991 Cyclone
138,868
1996 Tornado5451997 Cyclone
550
1998 Flood918
2004 Flood
747
2007 Flood
1,071
2007 Cyclone(SIDR) 3,406
2009 Cyclone (‘alia) 190 (as on
06/06/2009)

2.1 Bangladesh DM History•

Soon after 1991 cyclone which caused huge damage and loss, the country hasrealized that the reactive response to disaster is no longer an option for Bangladesh•

The country has adopted a paradigm shift from reactive response to comprehensive
DM approach that includes a number of strategies and mechanism/policy decision•

DMB was created in 1993•

SOD formulated in 1997 and revised in 2010 – SOD recognized every bodies roles
and responsibilities in DM and those are spelt out in the document. SOD•

CDMP was formulated in 2000 and launched in 2004•

MoFDM has been created in 2005•

Government also adopted a new DM vision•

A Bangladesh DM model has been created/developed and adopted – the model gave
main emphasis on disaster risk reduction.

2.1.1 GoB Vision•

To reduce the vulnerability of the poor to the effects of natural, environmental andhuman induced hazards to a manageable and acceptable humanitarian level.

2.1.2
•

GoB Mission
To bring a paradigm shift in disaster management from conventional response andrelief to a more comprehensive risk reduction culture.

2.1.3 Overall Objective•
To strengthen the capacity of the Bangladesh Disaster Management System toreduce unacceptable risk and improve response and recovery management at alllevels.

2.2 GoB Capacity in DM
Specialized Ministry for Food and Disaster Management•
Creation of Disaster Management Bureau (DMB): shifting focus from relief to disastermanagement specially to risk reduction culture.
•

ECNEC Decision as part of Mainstreaming of Disaster Risk Reduction.

•

Issuance of SOD (Standing Order on Disaster): establishing mechanisms andprocedures for effective response at all levels during disaster emergency•

Initiate formulation of ‘Comprehensive Disaster Management Framework’ involving
all disaster stakeholders including donor community•

From 2000 onwards – introduction and mainstreaming of risk reduction

Standing Orders On Disaster• The standing order
creates theopportunity toestablish disastermanagement
committee at every
level.
• The standing orders
for disastermanagement provide
ample scope for theGovernment, NGOs
and private sectors tothink locally and planneed based program
involving thecommunity.

22

2.3 National Plan for Disaster Management• To strengthen the capacity of disaster-prone countries to address risk;• To invest substantively in disaster preparedness;• To reduce the relief-development gap and thereby reduce vulnerability;• To enable civil society actors and affected communities to strengthen their resilience
to disasters• To reduce the gap between what we know and what we do, with the critical ingredient
being political commitment; and• To build on the momentum of this World Conference to accelerate implementation of
the Framework for Action.

2.4 Strategic Focus Area of Disaster Management in BangladeshProfessionalizing the Disaster Management SystemPartnership Development for Disaster managementCommunity Empowerment on Disaster Recovery

Expanding Prevention, Preparedness, Response and Recovery Programmes acrossa broader range of hazards

Strengthening Emergency Response Capabilities



Hazard Mapping of disaster prone areas

Disaster Management Institutions in BangladeshInter-Ministerial Disaster
Management Coordination
Committee (IMDMCC)DM Cell, PMO(Activated during
large scale disaster,
managed by AFD)

National Disaster Management
Advisory Committee (NDMAC)

Disaster Management & Relief Division
Department ofRelief andRehabilitation

2.5 Lines of Defense•

Structural
–
–
–
–

•

Cyclone shelters
Embankments
Polders, evacuation routes, killahs
Houses and building retrofitting (cyclone resilient)

Non structural–
Institutional preparedness–––

Warning system
Response preparedness
Community & civil society mobilization

2.6 Preparedness
2.6.1 National Disaster Response Coordination centre (NDRCC)–
24/7 facility at the DMRD, linked to districts, warning and response agencies–
Issues periodical DRR report
2.6.2 Directorate of Relief and Rehabilitation (DoRR)–
Stockpile at Dhaka, Chittagong, Khulna and Barisal–
Stockpiles at all coastal district under the jurisdiction of Deputy Commissioner–
Authorized to dispense cash and food for immediate and long term relief up tocertain extend
2.6.3 Cyclone Preparedness Program (CPP)–
Almost 50,000 community volunteers–
7 Zone districts, 37 Upazillas, 322 Unions (plus 5 new ly identified Upazillas)

2.6.4 Disaster Management Information Centre /Network (DMIC/N )–Maintains update shelter shelters database–
Direct communications with Upazilla PIOs–
Direct contacts with local DM Committees

2.7 National Priorities for 2011-2020•

Strengthen institutional capacity of all actors as per the revised SOD•

Implementation of the National Plan for Disaster Management (2010-2015)•

Coordinated social safety net to reduce vulnerable population•

Strengthen mechanisms for sectoral and local level implementation of DRR/CCA
measures

2.8 Regional Priorities for 2011-2020•

Coordination of regional agendas for global representation and national level
leveraging•

Establishing/utilization of common resources/mechanisms for enhancing national risk
reduction coordination•

Establishing a regional response plan/mechanism for catastrophic disaster3. Natural Disasters in Japan

National Disasters in JapanA Highly Developed country anda Country vulnerable to Disaster11

Japan is located in the Circum-Pacific Mobile Belt where seismic and volcanic activities
occur constantly. Although the country covers only 0.25% of the land area on the planet, thenumber of earthquakes and active volcanoes is quite high. Also, because of geographical,
topographical and meteorological conditions, the country is subject to frequent natural
hazards. Japan is one of the countries affected unpredicted events of natural disasters suchas earthquake, tsunami, floods, landslides and typhoons. Since 1950, many large scales
Earthquake, Tsunami, and Typhoons struck the country, which caused massive damage andgreat loss of economy. That kind of enormous disasters killed huge amount of people. In fact
the development of disaster counter measures has been contributing to the development ofsustainable disaster management system especially, advanced weather forecasting systemand disaster communication system.
The commonest disaster in Japan is Earthquake. Japan can have up to 5000 earthquakes
each year, which is about 10% out of the total occurred of the world. As a result ofEarthquakes, Tsunami can also develop to cause catastrophic damages to the coastal beltof the country, which are large waves that crash up against the shore and can wash away
people, buildings, and bridges. For example recent EQ and Tsunami (2011, Tohoku Pacific
Ocean Earthquake)
Volcanic eruptions are the next dangerous disaster facing in Japan. There are 67 active
volcanoes in Japan which means 10% of the world’s total active volcanoes over in Japan. A
volcanic eruption can discharge ash and lava all over the surrounding areas including
populated area too. During the rainy season Typhoons are occurring in Japan. Severe storm
may cause many damages along with landslides and floods. Japan hits about 29 Typhoons
in the year. Some recorded due to the worst meteorological changes, which causesignificant damage and loss of the human life.

Natural Disasters in Japan•

Earthquake•

Tsunami•Volcanic Eruption•

Typhoon

•

Flood

•

Landslide•

Snow Fall (Avalanche)

Number of earthquakes with magnitude of 6.0 orlarger (1995-2011)
Japan 210 (22%)

World 945

12

Source: Cabinet Office, Government of Japan

Comparison of Natural Disasters in Japanand Other Parts of the World
Number of earthquakes with magnitude of 6.0 or greaterJapan
212（20.5%）

World
1,036

Note：Total for 2000 to 2009.
Source：Prepared by the Cabinet Office based on data from the Japan
Meteorological Agency and world data from USGS.
5

Source: Cabinet Office, Government of Japan

Flood damage ( 1938,1967 )Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake ( Jan 17, 1995 )

Hit by many (ten) typhoons ( 2004 )

Niigata Chuetsu Earthquake ( Oct 23, 2004 )

Niigata Chuetsu –oki Earthquake ( Jul 16, 2007 )Great Sichuan Earthquake ( May, 2008 )Iwate –Miyagi Inland Earthquake ( June 14, 2008 )Great East Japan Earthquake ( March 11, 2011 )Nankai Earthquake ( Occurrence probability within 30 Years : 60 % )3.1 Disaster Management System of Japan

Organization of the national government of Japan
Disaster Management,
Cabinet OfficeCabinetCabinetSecretariat

Minister of State forDisaster Management
Ministry of Internal
Affairs andCommunications

Fire and Disaster
Management Agency

Ministry ofJustice

Director-Generalfor Disaster Management
Deputy Director-Generalfor Disaster Management

Ministry ofForeign Affairs

Directorfor Disaster Management

Ministry of
Finance
Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

Small and Medium
Enterprise Agency

Ministry of Health,Labour and Welfare

Agency for Natural
Resources and Energy

Ministry of Agriculture,
Forestry and Fisheries

Nuclear and Industrial
Safety Agency

Ministry of Economy,
Trade and Industry
Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport,
and Tourism

Japan Meteorological
Agency (JMA)

Ministry of
the Environment

Japan Coast
Guard

Ministry of
Defense

Geographical
Survey Institute

Director for
Disaster Prevention
and Preparedness
Director for
Disaster Response
Operations
Director for
Post-Disaster Recovery
and Reconstructions
Director for
Earthquake and Volcanic
Disaster Management

4

After the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, along with a series of reforms of the central
government system in 2001, a position entitled "Minister of State for Disaster Management"
was newly established to coordinate comprehensive disaster reduction measures throughout
the whole government. Furthermore, a Director-General for Disaster Management wasplaced in the Cabinet Office, whose role included planning basic disaster management
policies and responding to large-scale disasters, as well as conducting comprehensive
disaster-related coordination within the government.

5

3.2 Disaster Management Framework of Japan
Disaster Management of Japan is categorized into 3 levels including national, regional andmunicipal level. The significance of each level is detailed as follows:
National Level:
The Prime Minister is the National Commander through the National Disaster Management
Council, and the designed government organizations (23 ministries and agencies), anddesignated public cooperation (63 organizations including independent administrative
agencies, Bank of Japan, Japanese Red Cross Society, NHK, electricity and gas
companies). In this connection, the national council is responsible for formulation andpromoting the implementation of the Basic Disaster Management Plan. Meanwhile, theother two designed agencies of government and public cooperations are responsible forformulation and implementation of the Disaster Management Operation Plan.
Prefectural Level:
The Governor is the commander ordering via the Prefectural Disaster Management Council,
and the designed government organization and public corporations in local. The prefectural
council will conjunctionally work with the mentioned designed agencies to formulate andpromote the implementation of Local Disaster Management Plan
Municipal Level:
In this level, the Mayor of City, Town and Village is the commander, as the same ofGovernor in prefectural level, will take function through Municipal Disaster Management
Council to formulate and promote the implementation of Local Disaster Management Plan.

6

Source: Cabinet Office, Government of JapanThe Central Disaster Management Council is one of the councils that deals with crucial
policies of the Cabinet, and was established in the Cabinet Office of Japan.
The Council is chaired by the Prime Minister, and consists of all the Ministers of State
including the Minister of State for Disaster Management, heads of major public institutions,and leading experts.
The Council promotes comprehensive disaster countermeasures, including deliberating
important issues on disaster reduction according to requests from the Prime Minister or
Minister of State for Disaster Management.

3.3 Main contents of the Disaster countermeasures Basic Act
1．Definition of responsibilities for disaster management
2．Disaster management organizations
3．Disaster management planning system
4．Disaster prevention and preparedness
5．Disaster emergency response
6．Disaster recovery and rehabilitation
7．Financial measures

8．State of Disaster Emergency

4. The Concept of Recovery Process
The process of recovery consists of the stages of management of people, resources andstructure on the way to reaching the objectives of recovery. For this management, there are“three requisites for recovery” that are as following:
1. Heart/spirit of recovery: tenacity for improvement and norm in recovery. How the hopeand faith of community can be foster that should be considered.
2.

Skills for recovery: Planning skills in recovery process is most significant part of

newly undertaken projects for community of the affected areas. Both hardware ((physical)
and software (Human resources) element should be under considers ion the recovery
process.
3.

System for recovery: community participation and collaboration among the membersof the community is most important for creative recovery process. Partnership should be
developed between community, stakeholders and the local government for smooth
recovery process
4.1 Principles of Recovery
As a principle of recovery we have to involve the local community or stakeholders for
successful recover from post disaster situations. Here locality or community refers to1.

To sustain local society or community2.

To carry on local culture of the community3.

To utilize local resources.

4.2 Pre-Disaster Recovery Planning
1 What Is Pre-disaster Recovery Planning?
2

Why Plan For Recovery Before A Disaster Happens?

3

At What Scale Should Pre-planning Take Place?

4

How Does PDRP Fit Within The Disaster Management Cycle?

5

How Does One Pre-plan For Recovery

6

Getting Started

7

Collecting Preliminary Information

8

Establishing The Post Disaster Recovery Organization

9

Formulating Recovery Principles And Goals

10 Defining Strategies And Actions
11 Assessing And Maintaining The PlanPDRP consists of three components • Developing goals and strategies for post disaster recovery
based on disaster scenarios• Creating a recovery organizational structure with postdisaster roles and responsibilities• Planning pre-disaster actions that will expedite post disasterplanning
PDRP • Expedites recovery• Reduces risk of future disasters - Building back better• Enables demand-driven and inclusive recovery• Minimizes development deficits• Reduces recovery costs

Source: Guidance Note on Recovery, LIVELIHOOD, IRP

INTRODUCTION

Benefits of PDRP

Getting Started

Pre-Planning ProcessSchema: Steps for Pre-Disaster Recovery Planning

Determinethe policies

List the Actions – pre event,
short term, long term

Sort, and list, actions by Lead
Department

Each Lead Department, alongwith support departments,
develops Operational GuidanceSource: Guidance Note on Recovery, LIVELIHOOD, IRP

REVIEW AND UPDATE THE PLAN
Every 3-5 years

Steps

Define thefunctions5. Definition of Livelihood
The term livelihood comes to light when governments, civil society, and externalorganizations attempt to assist people whose means of making a living is threatened,damaged, or destroyed.
In order to better understand how people develop and maintain livelihoods, practitioners andacademics, developed the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF). This framework is ananalysis tool, useful for understanding the many factors that affect a person’s livelihood andhow those factors interact with each other. The SLF views livelihoods as systems andprovides a way to understand:1. the assets people draw upon
2. the strategies they develop to make a living
3. the context within which a livelihood is developed
4. and those factors that make a livelihood more or less vulnerable to shocks andstresses
Livelihood assets:
Assets may be tangible, such as food stores and cash savings, as well as trees, land,
livestock, tools, and other resources. It also be intangible that can make for food, work, andassistance as well as access to materials, information, education, health services andemployment opportunities. Another way of understanding the assets, or capitals, that people
draw upon to make a living is to categorize them into the five groups: human, social, natural,
physical, financial, and political capitals

5.1 Why consider Livelihoods in Recovery Process
The role of livelihoods-based responses following natural disasters has been debated within
the humanitarian community over the last decade. The importance of taking into account the
livelihoods of disaster affected populations and, where possible, protecting and developing
them, has been increasingly recognized and addressed by all key actors within disasterrecovery processes. More importantly, disaster affected populations have overwhelmingly
identified livelihoods as their greatest recovery priority. Assessing the impact of disasters on
the livelihoods of people and the capacity and opportunities for recovery and increased
resilience to future events is an important part of the response to disasters, yet current
assessment systems are often weak, uncoordinated and are not strongly linked to livelihood
recovery interventions.
In order to improve understanding of the impact of disasters on livelihoods, the Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the International Labour
Organization (ILO) have jointly developed the Livelihood Assessment Tool-kit (LAT).
The LAT consists of three main technical elements:
1. Livelihood Baseline Assessment (which is undertaken pre-disaster);
2. Immediate Livelihood Impact Appraisal (undertaken immediately after the disaster); and3. Detailed Livelihood Assessment (undertaken up to 90 days after the disaster).

5.2 Livelihood Assessment Tools and Standardsi ) Livelihood Assessment Tool-kit (LAT)
FAO and ILO developed the LAT to help recovery actors assess the impacts of disasters on
people’s livelihoods, and the capacities and opportunities for recovery. The toolkit iscomposed of three technical components:
1. Livelihood Baseline (LB) is undertaken pre-disaster to provide background information
for a range of response instruments, and lasting 2-6 weeks;
2. Initial Livelihood Impact Appraisal (ILIA) is to be completed within the first 10 days
after a disaster to support Flash Appeals; lasting 1-7 days; and3. Detailed Livelihood Assessment (DLA), usually conduced within 90 days after adisaster to support revised Flash Appeals, Post Disaster Needs Assessments, anddonor recovery conferences DLA; lasting 30 days.

Components of an early draft of the LAT were applied and adapted in 2007-2008 following
natural disasters in the Philippines, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Bolivia and as input todisaster preparedness efforts in Pakistan. Key Indicators include: % of households losing
employment due to disaster; % of households undertaking various coping strategies(including looking for work) after disaster; and Assets lost at household and community
levels (physical, human, financial, social and natural) after disaster.
ii) Households Economy Approach (HEA)The Household Economy Approach is a livelihoods-based framework for analyzing the way
people obtain food, non-food goods and services, and how they might respond to changes intheir external environment, shock or hazard. It aims to capture the situation of different
wealth groups in different livelihoods zones. This analytical framework has recently beenused in the 2004 East Indian Tsunami and 2005 Kashmir earthquake in Pakistan recovery
efforts. In a classic HEA assessment, the procedure is to build the baseline first, thenconduct the outcome analysis to plan the response as a separate exercise.
iii) Households Livelihood security Assessment (HLSA)The HLSA is a holistic and multi-disciplinary analysis which recognizes that poor families
commonly suffer more than one problem at a time and often have to make significant
sacrifices to meet their basic needs. HLS an integrated or systems approach to analysis,
with recognition that poor people and poor households live and interact within broader
socioeconomic and sociopolitical systems that influence resource production and allocation
decisions. The HLS assessment process aims to enhance understanding about local
livelihood systems – livelihoods, economic, socio-cultural and political systems and theconstraints, vulnerabilities, marginalization, and risks of poor families living within thiscontext – and important differences among types of households and among members within
the household.
iv) Emergency Market Mapping and Analysis (EMMA) Toolkit
The emergency market mapping and analysis (EMMA) toolkit is a set of tools and guidancenotes, designed to encourage and assist relief and recovery actors to better understand andmake use of market-systems. The ultimate purpose of EMMA is to improve the efficiency
and effectiveness of the early humanitarian actions taken to ensure people’s survival, protect
their food-security and their livelihoods. The EMMA toolkit is intended to complement
established humanitarian practices in diverse contexts and integrate flexibly into different
approaches to relief and recovery planning.
v) Minimum Standards for Economic Recovery after Crisis (ERS)The Minimum Standards for Economic Recovery after Crisis address strategies andinterventions designed to promote enterprises, employment, and cash flow and asset
management among affected enterprises and livelihoods in environments affected by conflictor disaster. The Standards include two overall sections on Common Standards andAssessments & Analysis, plus four distinct technical areas: financial services, assetsinterventions, employment creation, and enterprise development.
vi) Livelihood Emergency Guidelines and Standards (LEGS)The Livelihood Emergency Guidelines and Standards (LEGS) are a set of internationalguidelines and standards for the design, implementation and assessment of livelihoodinterventions to assist people affected by humanitarian crises. (Source: FAO/ILO, 2007,
Disaster Livelihood Assessment Toolkit)

5.3 Employment and Livelihoods
Recovery programmers should contribute to improve the living conditions of the affected
population.
Specific issues that may need addressing:• Agriculture and livestock production, through the provision of seeds, tools, micro- credits,and other means• Small business through the provision of credits or other means• Recovery of and improvement of productive social infrastructure such as roads, markets,
etc. which will support the economic activities• The reconstruction of the housing sector using local technologies, construction materials,
local know-how, to ensure that construction activities will have a direct positive impact
upon the local economy.
• Consideration of short-term gender sensitive alternative employment generation tocompensate lost livelihoods in the immediate post-disaster period
The guidelines and standards as well as further resources•
Easy to use guidance for ensuring build back better in recovery•
Guidance Notes on Recovery offers menu of options based on lessons learned andgood practices from global recovery operations in key themes: Shelter, Livelihood,
Environment, Gender, Public Infrastructure, Governance, Health, Psycho-social
Aspects, and Climate Change Adaptation•
Draws on best practices and lessons•
Peer review and inputs from experts for quality assurance ready for use•
Capacity building program for Government officials6. Bangladesh Disaster Recovery Plan and Program
Bangladesh's Vulnerability to Natural Disasters,
Seasonal Shocks and Climate Change
Vulnerability to Natural Disaster
Eighty percent of Bangladesh consists of floodplains created by more than 300 rivers andchannels, including three major rivers : the Ganges, the Brahmaputra and the Meghna.
Regular annual flooding has traditionally been beneficial to agriculture; but severe floods
occurring less frequently have had adverse impacts on residents and the economy. In thelast two decades, major floods occurred in 1988, 1998, 2004 and most recently in 2007affecting an estimated 11 million (2007) to 68 million (1998) people. The southern part of thecountry is also particularly vulnerable to cyclones-with a 710 km long coastal belt and anarea of about 37,000 sq. km. Major cyclones haveoccurred in 1970, 1985, 1991 and 2007, affecting an estimated 1.8 million (1985) to 10
million (1991) people. More than 500,000 deaths were reported due to 1970 cyclone and its
aftermath, while the 1991 cyclone caused 138,000 deaths.
Emerging Challenges of Climate Change
Climate models indicate that, by 2050, Bangladesh will experience increasing temperaturesand monsoon precipitation, intensified cyclones, more severe droughts, and river bankerosion. Additionally, a simultaneous rise in the sea level may alter the sediment balanceand salinity in coastal areas. Potential effects of climate change of poverty are substantial,
affecting natural resources and common property resources such as fisheries, mangrovesand forests, which provide livelihood support for the poor. Furthermore, disasters such as
catastrophic floods generate shocks to household savings and consumption and exacerbate
food insecurity, water stress, and health problems. Flood-prone districts of Bangladesh, forexample, have consistently greater poverty ratios, suggesting a geographic poverty trap.
2007: The Year of Natural Disasters
An unusually severe monsoon flooded Bangladesh along with neighboring countries in 2007.
By end-July, the floods were affecting 39 of the country's 64 districts, including almost half ofthe total land area of the Dhaka and Sylhet divisions, and a quarter of Rajshahi division.
Preliminary and incomplete figures indicate an estimated 11 million people affected, withdamages to 1 million homes, 1.1 million hectares of crops, and more than 23,000 kilometersof roads. Just as Bangladesh was beginning to recover from the floods a Category 4 tropical
cyclone (Cyclone Sidr) struck its costal area. Recent literature on vulnerability and risks in
Bangladesh has also highlighted the hardship caused by other covariate shocks such as
rapidly rising price inflation of essentials. For example, during the period 2007-2008, retailprice of rice in Bangladesh increased by around 38.8 per cent in rural areas and 36.8
percent in urban areas (which in its term was caused by supply shocks due to floods,
cyclones and total disruption of the import of food grain from external sources due to upward
price spiral internationally and export curbs imposed by major exporter of rice to Bangladesh
namely India). This price hike has had a substantial welfare impact since rice accounts for asignificant proportion of household expenditure, more so for poorer. In the southerncoastline on November 15, 2007, with a radius of 74 kilometers and wind speeds reaching
223 kilometers /hour, it killed nearly 4,000 people and affected the lives of about 8.7 million
people in 30 out of the 64 districts in the country. While the country's cyclone-preparedness

program, including advance warnings systems, awareness-building, and shelter availability
prevented the death toll from reaching the levels seen during earlier cyclones, economic
losses were extensive, including destruction or damage to standing rice crops, fisheries(particularly shrimp farms), forestry, livestock housing, rural roads, and embankments.
6.1 Poverty Disaster Interface•

Adverse long-term impact on economic and social activities•

The poor are more vulnerable to any kind of disaster•

Depletion of assets•

Income reduction due to loss of employment•

Increase indebtedness•

Increase migration•

Cost to cope with disaster disproportionately higher for the poor

6.2 Natural Disaster Recovery Program
Government’s Vision: To reduce the vulnerability of people, especially the poor, to theeffects of natural, environmental and human induced hazards to a manageable andacceptable humanitarian level.
•

Bangladesh regularly faces natural disasters such as flood, tidal bore, tornado,
cyclone, droughts etc. The shocks of these disasters have a disproportionate impact
on the poor. In response to such shocks, households adopt coping strategic such as
reducing food intake, sale of productive assets, restoring to high interest loans andcontracting family members to hazardous labor that compromises their well-being.

•

Poor are Hardest Hit: In a disaster situation, those living near the poverty line caneasily slip below it. The landless and near landless may be forced to sell their limited
assets for survival needs. Those who depend upon wage labour for subsistence areforced to migrate the village and enter into competitive labour market. Loss of harvest
and less alternative source of employment further aggravate the already depressedsituation.

•

The frequently adverse impact of weather-related disasters has given rise to tworeactions in Bangladesh.
• First, there is the inevitable need for emergency Gratuitous Relief (GR)operations. This is a Government program run by the Department of Relief
and Rehabilitation. It is designed to provide emergency relief to disastervictims. While it is a relatively small program, it is the main instrument throughwhich the Government provides immediate, short-term relief to disaster areas.
Vulnerable Group Feeding (VGF) , is triggered by disaster and is use ofpurely as an emergency program.
•

Secondly, there is considerable interest in risk mitigation program.

Immediate Assistance Needs•

Search and rescue operation•

Supply of instant food•

Medicare•Water and sanitation•

Temporary shelter for displaced people•

Restoration of livelihoods

6.3 Ministry of Food & Disaster Management
Disaster Management & Relief Division
Directorate of Relief & Rehabilitation•

Policy formulation and implementation of programs/ policies. To Monitor andimplement all Food Assisted Programmes Food for Work and Test Relief schemes.

•

Monitor & implement Relief Operations. Implementation of Rehabilitation schemes.

•

Implementation of Vulnerable Group Feeding VGF programme including Vulnerable
Group

•

Development VGD Programmes. Distribution of gratuitous relief Sanction of carrying
cost of food grains of FFW, T.R, VGD, VGF, Programme etc.

•

Distribution of House Building grants. Preparation of budget of the Directorate.
Administrative control of District Relief and Rehabilitation Officers (DRRO) andUpazila Project Implementation Officers (PIO) and their subordinate staffs.

•

Maintenance & control of relief transport in the Directorate as well as in the field.
Construction of Small Bridges, Culverts, flood shelters, Cyclone shelters.
Implementation of Food Security Enhancement Initiative Programme. Implementationof Disaster Management Programme. Implementation of Risk Reduction Programme

6.4 Areas of Social Protection•– Social Safety Net•– Food Security•– Micro Micro-Credit•– Rural Employment•– Disaster Management•– Basic health service•

Access to public schools

6.5 Types of Social Protection Program

Cash transfer

Food AssistanceSocial Empowerment



Access to basic health care

Food Security and Disaster Assistance
Vulnerable Group Development (VGD)
VGD Program was introduced in 1975 to help women affected during the liberation war of
Bangladesh in 1971 with food aid from the World Food Programme (WFP). It has continued
ever since and has also produced various off-shoot programs such as IGVGD. The programaims at developing marketable skills and efficiency of women through training, help
formation of capital through motivating savings and providing scope for availing micro credit.
Another important goal of the programme is to build social awareness on disastermanagement and nutrition through training in groups. The beneficiaries get 30 Kilograms ofwheat, about 150 hrs of training for a period of 24 months. The targeting criteria for the
programme includes i) households with not more than 15 acres of land; ii) monthly
Household income less than Tk.300; iii) dependent upon seasonal wage employment;iv)women of reproductive (18-49) age; v) day labour or temporary worker; and vi) lackaccess toproductive assets.
Vulnerable Group Feeding (VGF)
The program is aimed at extending assistance in the form of food and basic necessities toselected households in the months following a disaster when agricultural production has
been severely disrupted. VGF began in the mid-1990s and has continued since then throughsupplementary food aid from the WFP. Under the programme, a person gets 10 Kgs of foodgrain per month for three months following the disaster.
Social Safety Nets in Bangladesh

Government has allocated 15% of the total national budget against social protection
program of the country which is 2.5% of the GDP in 2011-12 FY
Test Relief
Test Relief (TR), a food transfer program for those of working age to create employment forthe poor in the rainy season to construct, develop and maintain rural infrastructure which has
considerably lighter labour requirement compared to FFW. Under the program, a beneficiarygets 8 kg of food grain per day for a maximum of 30 days.
Gratuitous Relief (GR)GR, as distinct from TR, provides emergency food and other necessities to the victims ofnatural calamities. The programme is short-term in nature and has a provision to transfer 10
KG of food grains per person per month. Additionally, under the programme cash can be
distributed as well.
Employment/Workfare
Food For Work (FFW)/Cash for Work (CFW)
These programs have two major objectives, namely. i) employment generation for theaffected people in the slack season, and ii) development and maintenance of rural
infrastructures. Several Ministries/Agencies including MOFDM, MOWR, MOSW and LGED
run the various initiatives under the programme with resources provided by the GoB, ADB
and the WFP. Both FFW and CFW are self-targeting with wage offered being lower than themarket to discourage the non-poor to benefits from these programs.

Employment Guarantee Programme (formerly 100 Days Programme)
This program was introduced by the Caretaker Government in the 2008-09 with an initial
allocation of Taka 926 crore and an aim of creating 30.86 lac man-month of work. The main
objective of the Programme was to benefit 2,000,000 poor each of whom received Tk. 100
wage for a 100-day cycle.
REOPA
Rural Employment Opportunities for Public assets (REOPA) is a EU/UNDP supported 5 year
project (2007-12) aimed at creating self-employment opportunities of the women, providing
training covering various issues of life still management, and, creation and maintenance of
public assets. A key focus of the program is also to help develop the capacity of the women
to run Income Generating Activities (IGAs) successfully. By the end of the project cycle,
participants are supposed to have a certain amount of capital accumulated from savings
from their daily wage to use for undertaking feasible IGAs. Financially supported by the EU,
the capacity development interventions of the REOPA are being managed by UNDP,
Bangladesh. Allocations for 2010-11 is Taka 77.69 crores to cover 388 UPs in 6 districts.
NGO Programs
In comparison to government programs, number of NGO programs are more limited inmember. However, NGOs also participate in the implementation of many government
programs.
Vulnerable Group Development for the Ultra Poor (VGDUP)
VGDUP is an EU funded program aimed at graduating destitute women and theirdependents out of poverty. in 2008-09, assistance was provided to 40,000 destitute womenin haor and monga areas.
CFPR-TUP
BRAC's Challenging the Frontiers of Poverty Reduction: Targeting the Ultra Poor (CFPRTUP) programme emphasizes economic development through assets transfer but also
includes a monthly subsistence allowance designed to cover a portion of a households basic
needs; such as food and other essentials. The subsistence allowance varies according toeach participant's case. It is implemented in monga-affected districts and has a time span of
2002-2011. Cumulative coverage since 2002 is 272,000 beneficiaries. Average annual
allocation is Taka 260 crores.
SOUHARDO
Strengthening Household Abilities for Responding to Development Opportunities(SOUHARDO) is a USAID funded and CARE Bangladesh implemented program aimed at
nutrition, food security and capacity building for poor households. Phase 1 of the program
lasted from 2005-2010 and a new phase up to 2015 has begun. The program reaches
average of 74,000 households per annum in food-insecure areas of chars, haors and coastal
areas. During 2010-11, Taka 98.46 crores have been allocated for the program. NGOs andlocal government bodies also participate in the implementation of the program.
Grameen Insurance Programs
Two newly introduced insurance products of Grameen Bank, the 'Loan insurance Fund' andthe 'Grameen Life Insurance' is yet another category of social safety net protection from the
NGO sector. Under the 'loan insurance fund' scheme, outstanding loan and interest of

deceased borrowers are paid off from the fund. Borrower needs to deposit Tk. 30 per
thousand for herself and Tk. 30 for the husband or Tk. 60/ month. At the death of theborrower or husband, entire outstanding amount of the loan is considered paid off. In
addition, if the borrower withdraws her membership from the group she gets back theamount contributed in the fund.

6.6 Impacts of Social safety Nets The majority of the households benefiting from the safety net programs based on
cash transfer have been able to increase household income and recover theirlivelihood.
 Programs targeted at women have (a) increased women's participation in household
decision-making; (b) improved health conditions of women and their family members;(c) encouraged small investment for income generation in the future; and (d) revived
the traditional system of in-family care.
 VGD, TR and EGP also have a development impact.
 Safety net programs in Bangladesh have also become successful to a certain extent
in DRR
 Evidence on the impact of conditional transfer programs indicates positive impacts onhuman capital accumulation

7. A Case study of Livelihood Recovery Program in Bangladesh

on 25th May 201020

Death Toll

190

Total Affected Districts

11

Affected Upazila

64

Affected UP/Municipality

529

Affected Family (1m)

948,621Affected People (4m)

3,928,238

Injured Persons

7,103

Embankment damaged

1,742 Km

Crop loss

77,486 acre Fully, 2,45.968 acre Partly

Educational Institute Damaged

445 Partly, 4588 Partly

Road Damaged

2,233 Km Fully, 6,622 Partly

Bridges 7 culverts

157

7.1 Major Emergency Relief by DMRD
Gratuitous Relief: Rice

US$ 12.15 million (BDT 85.05 core)

27951 MT
Gratuitous Relief: Cash

US$ 1.9 million (BDT 12.88 core)

House Building

US$ 4.28 million (BDT 30.02 core)Total

US$ 18.33 million (BDT 127.95 core)7.2 Restoration of Livelihood
SectorEstimated Loss

Rehabilitation Cost

AgricultureUS$million

US$ 50 million

Livestock

US$ 1.93
Million

US$ 1 million

Fisheries

US$ 46.93
Million

US$ 5.02million

Total

US$ 155.30 m(BDT 10871 m)

US$ 56.02 million(BDT 3921.40 million)

106.44

7.3 Repair of Damage Embankment


Number of Polder Damaged 47

Affected Area

188000 hectors

Assistance to repair damaged

116 crore Takaembankments by DMRD

(US$ 16.5 m)

including Rice

25000 MT

41 numbers of polder repaired within 2 months of the Cyclone Aila

7.4 International Donor AssistanceDonor

Amount (US$)

Sectors/Activities

ECHO

11.93 mFood Assistance, Health & Wash

EU

6.63 mShelters

DFID

1.58 mNFIs, Settlement Support (through IOM)

SDC

1.31 mLivelihoods & WASH

Govt. of Spain

0.66 mFood Assistance (through WFP)

WFP

18.5 mFood Assistance

UNICEF1.5
m/0.54/0.75 mm

WASH/Education/Health /Nutrition

FAO

0.5 m

Agriculture

UNDP

0.25 mLivelihoods

WHO

0.10 mEmergency Medicine & Wash

Total

44.25 mPresent Situation of Affected Areas
Out of 64 affected upazilla 60 upazilla have been recovered from devastation. Remaining 4
upazillas not yet recovered as embankment could not be repaired. For this reason 48000
families are homeless and living on the embankments or other places

Support to Worst Affected 4 Upazillas from DMRD

District

UpazilaIncomeGrant
for Blanket generating
FFW
VGF
activities for ultra
Housing(in(in(inmetric(inmillion thousand poor
metricTon)(inmillionUS
US Dollars) units)
Ton)
Dollars)

Koira

US$ 0.36(BDT 2.50 2.5
crore)

US$ 0.21(BDT 14102400)

US$ 0.36(BDT 2.50 2.5
crore)

US$ 0.66(BDT 46417600)

US$ 0.36(BDT 2.50 2.5
crore)

US$ 0.48(BDT 46417600)

6805.8(upto May 400’10)KhulnaDacopeAshashuni

US$ 0.142 m
(
1
crore
BDT)
1800
(upto
’10)

Sathkhira
US$ 0.47
Shyamnagar (BDT 3.29 2.5
crore)

Water
transportation
cost(in million US
Dollars)

May 550

US$ 1.42(BDT 100454400)

Allocation of Fund for Homeless People Living on the Embankment
BDT 96 crore (US$ 13.71 m) allocated for construction/ repair of household of 48,000 homelesspeople who took shelter on the embankment. BDT 76 crore (US$ 10.86 m) allocated for 38000
families of Khulna (Koyra and Dacope). BDT 20 crore (US$ 2.85 m) allocated for 10000 families ofSatkhira (Shyamnagar and Ashashuni). (BDT 12,000 to buy 2 bundles of CI sheets and BDT 8,000 forother necessary equipments/materials, total of BDT 20,000 for each affected families

7.5 Needs and Priorities (Short –Term)
1. Restoration of livelihood
2. Construction of clusterhouses for landless people
3. Reconstruction of houses for
affected people
4. Ensure safe drinking watera) Desalination plantb) Re-excavation & digging new pondsc) Installation of deep tube welld) Rain water harvesting

7.6 Needs and Priorities (Long-Term)
1. Construction of cyclone shelters with killas (elevated land for shelter of livestock)
2. Reconstruction/Construction of embankment with modified design
3. Disaster resistant housing
4. Disaster resilient cluster village
5. Reconstruction of educational institutions
6. Reconstruction/Construction of roads
Emergency livelihood programs taken by NGOs (approved by NGO bureau)•

No. of NGOs

: 51

•

Total no of projects

: 64

•

Total Approved Fund

: US$ 6.35 million•

Total Beneficiaries (Family) : 374,284

7.7 Disaster Recovery Act/ Guidelines
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Specific Relief Act 1877
Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies Act 1961
The Foreign Donations (Voluntary Activities) Regulation Ordinance, 1978.
Standing Orders on Disasters 2010
Disaster Management & Relief Act 2011
Guidelines of CFW, FFW. EGPP, REOPA, VGD, VGF etc

8. Constraints and challenges


The Bangladesh government has implemented a range of social protection program
but there is no national strategy paper. There should be a National Policy on Social
protection. The Integrated Safety Nets Policy Guidelines are also needed fordevelopment of a multi-year livelihood recovery programme

There is no Social Protection Act/ Law including the livelihood recovery act. Though
the DM act has been approved by the cabinet , but there should be separate Social
Protection Counter measure lawBangladesh has an elaborate system of social safety nets operated by 13 different
ministries and some NGOs covering various target group. Some of these
programmes are food based, some are cash based, and some are both food andcase based. Consolidate, coordinate and linkage with all safety nets are difficulttask.
 Targeting effectiveness needs to be improved to ensure that the benefits of the
programmes reach the real effected people

The livelihood recovery programme should also include capacity building at various
levels to improve the management of these safety net programmes.

Need to establishing the database for the affected people for victim registration andtracking.



A key challenges for effective livelihood program is design innovations based on
ground realities including the pre-disaster recovery plan

Coverage of all the affected people specially for constructing houses is a greatchallenges.

9. Disaster victims Livelihood Recovery Support System in JapanThe Disaster Victims Livelihood Recovery Support System is based on the Act on Support
for Livelihood Recovery of Disaster Victims, which was enacted in 1998 following the Great
Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995. Under this system, a “livelihood recovery support
payment for disaster victims” is disbursed to persons whose livelihoods are severely
damaged by disasters. The purpose of this system is to support victims in recovering theirnormal lives, bring stability to the lives of residents, and facilitate the quick recovery ofdisaster-stricken areas. Specifically, the livelihood recovery support payment for disastervictims is disbursed to households whose homes are completely destroyed in disasters of acertain scale or greater, up to a maximum of three million yen.
9.1 Contents of Disaster Recovery and rehabilitation Measures①
Disaster Recovery Project
The recovery of damaged public infrastructure facilities, educational facilities, welfare
facilities and agricultural, forestry and fishery facilities is either conducted directly by thenational government or put into practice by the local government with subsidies from thenational government.
②

Disaster Relief Loans

Persons engaged in the agriculture, forestry or fishery industries, small and medium
enterprises and low-income people who incurred damage are eligible for a variety of lowinterest loans with rather generous conditions as compared to normal ones.
③

Disaster Compensation and Insurance

Affected persons engaged in the agriculture, forestry or fishery business can obtaincompensation for disaster losses. Earthquake insurance system has been established by thenational government.
④ Tax Reduction or Exemption
For affected persons, measures are taken for the reduction, exemption and postponed
collection of income and residential taxes.
⑤

Tax Allocation to Local Governments and Local Bonds

For affected local governments, measures such as delivery of special tax allocations andpermission to issue local bonds are taken.
⑥ Designation of Extremely Severe DisasterWhenadisastercausesextremely

severedamage,itisdesignatedan“extremely

severedisaster.”Various special measures are to be taken for disaster recovery projects.

⑦

Assistance for the Rehabilitation Plan

Assistance is provided, when necessary, for local government rehabilitation plans, whichshould be quickly and accurately formulated and implemented.
⑧

Support for the Livelihood Recovery of Disaster Victims

Assistance is provided for victims to support their self supporting efforts through disastercondolence money, disaster impediment sympathy money, money for support of livelihood
recovery of disaster victims and loans such as disaster relief funds and livelihood welfare
fund (Source : Cabinet Office, Japan Government )9.1 Japanese Disaster Relief Act• Emergency relief
 Emergency or temporary relief following a disaster Distinct from restoration activities• Protecting victims and maintaining social order Part of the purpose of the act (Article 1)
 Measures taken according to the scale of the disaster• Central government provides services in cooperation with local public entities
 Relief personnel and resources provided as necessary in cooperation with local public
entities
Outline of the Current Act
 Purpose• To provide central government services in cooperation with local public entities• To provide relief services on an emergency basis• To protect disaster victims and maintain public order Administration• In places designated as disaster areas by declaration of the prefectural governor• Activities administered by municipal governments(some relief work may be entrusted to other agencies) Criteria for invoking the act• Damage to homes or other essential facilities• Risk of injury or loss of life
9.1.1 Types of Relief Activities• Provision of accommodation including emergency temporary housing• Distribution of food and drinking water• Distribution of clothing, bedding and other necessities• Medical and natal care
• Rescue of disaster victims• Emergency repairs of housing• Distribution of school supplies• Financial support to restor livelihood.
9.1.2 Scope, Methods, time, Periods of Activities• Determined by the prefectural governor, pursuant to regulations of the Ministry of Health,Labour and Welfare• The regulations specify types of activities, expense limits, time periods, etc.
 Refer to the Regulations for Disaster Relief, 2008
Standard for invoking the Disaster Relief Act• Damage to homes or other essential facilities When homes of a specified number of households are destroyed• In proportion to the population of the municipality, or• In proportion to the population of the prefecture and the municipality, or• In proportion to the population of the prefecture• Risk of injury or loss of life When many people are at risk or likely to be at risk of personal injury or death9.1.3 Compensation Payments
 Compensation for Death• Administration
 Municipal government• Disaster situation
 Natural disaster• Destruction of at least five households in a single municipality• Designation of at least one municipality within the prefecture as a disaster area
• Eligible relatives
 Spouse, children, parents, grandchildren, grandparents• Amounts
 Death of household provider: 5 million yen Other death: 2.5 million yen
9.1.4Compensation for Disability• Administration
 Municipal government• Disaster situation
 Natural disaster• Destruction of at least five households in a single municipality• Designation of at least one municipality within the prefecture as a disaster area
• Eligibility
 Persons seriously disabled by the disaster• Amounts Household provider: 2.5 million yen Other person: 1.25 million yen
9.1.5 Disaster relief Loan
 Loans for Disaster Relief• Administration
 Municipal government• Disaster situation
 Designation of at least one municipality within the prefecture as a disaster area
• Eligibility
 Persons injured or suffering damage to home or possessions in the disaster• Maximum loan
 3.5 million yen• Repayment period
 10 years (payments deferred for 3 or 5 years)
9.1.6 Responsibilities for emergency Relief Under disaster
Relief Act• Responsibilities of the central government
 Data collection, personnel assignments, technical advice, etc.
• Responsibilities of prefectural governments Collection and dissemination of damage information, performance of relief work
(invocation of the Disaster Relief Act), personnel assignments, etc.
• Responsibilities of municipal governments Collection and dissemination of damage information, performanceof emergency relief work, etc.
• Japan Red Cross Dispatching of rescue squads, etc.

 Invocation of the Disaster Relief Act (1998 - 2007)• Invocations during 2007: 5 prefectures, 15 municipalities
Source: Office of the Disaster Relief Program, Social welfare and Relief Bureau, Ministry of
Health, Labour and Welfare, 2009, The Japanese Disaster Relief Act
9.1.7 Act on Support for livelihood Recovery of Disaster Victim 1998
General Provisions:This Act shall be determined measures to grant financial assistance to victims of life
reconstruction fund to take advantage of remarkable person who has suffered the damage totheir livelihood by natural disasters, the prefecture had contributed in terms of mutual aid by,to support the reconstruction of their lives, and thereby to contribute to the rapid
reconstruction of the affected areas and the stabilization of life of residents have.
The damage caused natural disasters, storms, heavy rain, heavy snow, flood, storm surge,
earthquake, tsunami, volcanic eruption by other unusual natural phenomena, household
affected by natural disaster shall be specified by a Cabinet Order.

10. A Case Study of Recovery Program In Japan

Great Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake (1995)

11

At 5:46 a.m. on January 17, 1995 the Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake, which struck rightunder the city of Kobe in Western Japan, caused heavy damage. More than 240,000
buildings were completely or partially destroyed, and more than 6,400 people lost their lives.
Over 80% of those who died were crushed or suffocated by damaged structures. Most of thedamaged buildings had been built before the building code standards were upgraded in
1981.
Following the Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake, the Government of Japan developed andstrengthened disaster management systems. In 1995, the government amended the"Disaster Countermeasure Basic Act" and enacted the "Special Measure for Earthquake
Disaster Countermeasure Act."

10.1 Overview of Damages












Death and Missing toll 6,437
Death toll 4,571
Damage of building and structure 67,421 fully, 55,145 partly
Gross area of structure totally burnt 819,108 sq.m
Electricity- disconnected city wide
Telephone -25% disconnected
Water -failure almost citywide
Gas about – about 80% disconnected
Small and medium enterprise—50% completely destroyed
Shopping arcade- 50% severely damaged
Number of fire incidents : 175

Recovery Process Organization of search and rescue teams
 Setup of evacuation sheltersProvision of hot meal
Provision of safe drinking water
Construction temporary housing

10. 1 Formulation of Kobe City recovery Plan
The Kobe City Recovery Plan consists of 2 blocks; the first block as a foundation is"Recovery Plan Guidelines”, and the second block is the recovery plan itself. Field –specificplans were prepared by each department of the Kobe city government in charge, which
formed detailed plans under the city recovery plan. The Recovery Plan by goal are :1. Recover Citizens Life
2. Recover Industry
3. Recover Livelihood
4. Strengthen Disaster Response Capacity
5. Promote Collaborative Community Development

10.2 Kobe City Recovery Project (1000)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Infrastructure Reconstruction
Housing Reconstruction/ Restoration/
City Planning/ Urban Renewal
Economic vitalization
Measures of SMEs
Livelihood recovery
Disaster –Safe City

Basic structure of the recovery projects

Life

Economic
Vitalization

RecoveryMeasures forsmall andmedium size
companies

Disaster
Safe City
Housing
Reconstruction

Urban
Planning

Infrastructure Reconstruction


The top line shows life recovery for the survivors of the disasters. Infrastructure andhousing reconstruction and job securement are prerequisite to help victims return to theself-sustainable lives they led before the disaster.

Support for Housing: Kobe City Special housing loans for recovery from the disaster ( Interest rate 2.8% ) Housing Reconstruction loans for Hyogo Prefecture Residents ( Interest rate 1.5% ) Financing system for elderly people
 Support for large scale repair
Economic Vitalization
 The economic blow caused by the earthquake is estimated to be around 2 trillion 540
billion yen and the opportunity loss in economic activities over 5 trillion yen.

Economic vitalization means job securement. This means protect SMEs that produce
local job opportunities
Recovery Industry/Employment

10.3 Three Basic view Points of Economic Recovery


Respect of the Market Mechanism that allows choice by the local communities



Program Packaging and Required Development of social experiment ( Type Policies )Establishment of Governance by various bodies

10.4 Post Earthquake Livelihood Situation and Process for Recovery
The major reasons for unemployment caused by a huge disaster are bankruptcy, businessclosure and business shrinkage. Among the impacts due to a huge disaster on
industry/economy, unemployment benefits is possibly the most serious one. The average job
loss was 31000 per month. Taking as an example the number of unemployment benefits
recipients, it grows from 10,000 in the month prior to the earthquake to 27000 in April. Under
the Employment Expansion Program Kobe/ Hyogo Prefecture carried out various
unemployment benefits:
1.

Promotion of Employment Securing Measures Job exploitation by Employment development Promotion Team Utilization of employment development subsidy for specified job seekers
 Financial incentives for employment for quake victims

2.

Job maintenance support at companies
 Fureai Hello Work Program ( job application, job counselling, job referral,
training)
 Organizing joint job interview
 Utilization of Care Card for counselling of job seekers
 Support of the quake victims moving out of the prefecture

3.

Promotion of Job assistance measures
 Implementation of Job Development Program in quake hit area
 Work program for elderly

4.

Implementation of livelihood support measures
 Implementation of loan for livelihood stabilization of displaced workers
 Utilization of Employment Insurance System

5.

Community Business Community business composed of local inhabitants and volunteers is a
program that tries to meet diverse and individual needs found in thecommunity.

Source: City of Kobe, 2010, Comprehensive Strategy for Recovery from the Great
Hanshin- Awaji Earthquake
10.5 Hanshin Awaji Reconstruction Plan
Basic Theme ■ Harmonious Coexistence Between People and Nature,

People and People, and People and Society
Basic Goals ■Creation of a welfare society tailored for the 21st century
Creation of a culturally rich society open to the world
Basic View ■ Creative ReconstructionCreation of a society where existing industries grow and new industries flourishCreation of a disaster-resistant metropolis where people can live with confidenceFormation of a multi-centered network-type metropolitan area

Duration Established July 1995 ■ Target Year 2005
Expenses
Planned Amount ：$170 billion (660 Projects)
Actual Amount ： $163 billion (1,358 Projects)
Collaboration of Citizens, NPOs, Corporations and Governments

An. Earthquake Victim Reconstruction Support Committee formed.
In addition to “Self support” and “Public support”, “Mutual support” is importantCollaboration of Citizens, NPOs, Corporations and Governments
Consists of scholars, supporters, volunteer group etc.
Act on Support for Livelihood Recovery of Disaster Victims (May 1998)
Under this act there was a provision of Grant for Elderly Households, but they were notsufficient to meet the needs of the earthquake victims. The laws was then revised in 2007
and making available an additional grant between 500,000 yen to 2million yen.
The “Act on Support for Livelihood Recovery of Disaster Victims” has been applied todisaster that have occurred since then, and, as of October 2009, a total of 22.8 billion yen
has been provided to approximately 17,700 households.
10.6 Seven Elements of Life Recovery (05Years after EQ)•
Workshop on life recovery hold ( Ideas from 1623 victims )•Housing ( No. 1 Priority -30.1% )•Social Ties ( Mutual Support and support for Elderly- 25.1% ) )•Community Rebuilding ( Better Living Condition-12.1% )•Physical & Mental health ( 9.5% )•Preparedness ( alert for future disaster-9.5% )•Economic and Financial Situation ( Employment- 8.5% )•Relation to Government ( support the Area not the individual-5.2% )Recovery of Civic life Assessment ( 2003 ) On the decline : 48.0%
Effect of recession: 57.6%
 Don’t know
: 6.1%
Illness and retirement : 22.4%
 Improved: 6.7%
Effect of earthquake: 15.1%
 The same
: 39.2%Other reason: 4.9%
 A questionnaire on economic and financial situation sent to 10,000 Kobe citizen and
48% answered that their situations has gotten worsen since the earthquake. This isbecause of the Livelihood and employment were not given the highest priorities in
the recovery process. (Source : City of Kobe, 2010, Comprehensive Strategy for
Recovery from the Great Hanshin- Awaji Earthquake)11. Lessons Learned and Challenges
 As the recovery process varies according to the location and nature of disaster Need to decide what kind of livelihood recovery process should be carried out ( Need
Based )
 Basic concept of Support System ( Community or Individual ) What kind of arrangement are needed to fulfill the individual need ( Can’t not support
all the individual need of shelter and employment ) Identify the individual’s basic need during normal time Public support is not enough , mutual help/aid is needed Reconstruction of Housing requires huge budget ( donation from the prefectures are
not sufficient ) Employment and Job creation for all the victims is a difficult task.
 Pre-disaster planning of one experiences may not be applicable for other upcoming
disaster as the nature, magnitude , area/location, social or economic system are
different ( for example of great Hanshin-Awaji disaster and Tohoku disaster) Relocation of victims with different community Municipality or Prefecture needs special fund to address the individual needs
 Revision of Livelihood Recovery Act 1998
 External economic recession
 Earthquake Insurance system- Difficult to measure risks
 Due to the absence of victim registration , data base profile of the victims or tracking
system their previous livelihood status or change of profession after disaster can not
be identified
 Livelihood baseline assessment is necessary
 Benefits according to the income level is not rational 3 system for providing a Safe City- i) Disaster-preventive management ii) Disaster –preventive living zone iii) Disaster-preventive city infrastructure PDCA cycle is a continuous process Don’t have any information how many people became disabled after disaster -Survey
is required
 Establishment of life recovery HQ ( shelter, temporary/ permanent

housing,

employment, health etc)
 Mutual help, self help , neighborhood help and community help is necessary fordisaster mitigation
 DM requires coordinated by individuals , communities and governments
 new way of living with community businesses12. Comparative Study of DM System and livelihood Recovery Program inJapan and Bangladesh
BANGLADESH
JAPAN Disaster
Prone-Earthquake,
volcanoes, Tsunami Paradigm shift in 1991 from relief tocomprehensive DM & DRR

 Pioneer in DM & DRR since 1959

 Strong DM Basic Countermeasure
Act ( formulated in 1961).Updated
regularly Reform in the Central Govt. system
in 2001, a position of Minister ofState for DM was newly established.
Furthermore a DG for DM wasplaced in Cabinet Office Disaster
Managementin
Layer( National, Prefecture
Municipal level ) Disaster Prone-Earthquake, volcanoes,
Tsunami03
and Community mobilization and strong
Community to response against any
kind of disaster. Every citizen knows
the concept of self help, mutual
help/ neighbor help and community
help during disaster Specific Act on Support for
Livelihood Recovery of Disaster
Victims 1998 and revised in 2007.

 Formulated Pre-disaster and postdisaster recovery plan Central Govt. plays major role fordamage assessment and technical DM Countermeasure Act
crystallized ( DM Act 2011 )

yet

not

 A new division established in 2009 to
deal with DM affairs exclusively named“ Disaster Management and Relief
division”

 Disaster
Managementin04
Layer( National, District, Upazila andUnion level ) Govt.
play
major
role
after
disaster .Community mobilization andcommunity
volunteers
expanding
gradually.

 No specific Livelihood Recovery Act/
Law, but guidelines are present National Plan for Disaster Management
present

 Local Bodies plays major role fordamage assessment

support after disaster Insufficient budget allocation of DRR
 Sufficient Budget for DRR

 Efficient DM system for Earthquakeand other disaster More emphasis on Life Line Recovery( Road, gas, electricity, housing ,employment etc)- holistic approach
which has direct link with livelihood
recovery No tracking system for the victims

 Disaster relief loan, community
business activities, employment,
insurance, low interest housing fund, Shelter/housing construction is themain basis for livelihood

 Un-employment allowances for 06
months Efficient DM system for Cyclone , but
Urban DM system ( Earthquake ) yet not
crystallized Specific emphasis on livelihood recovery
program, but not an integrated
approach Short term tracking system for thevictim present Different DRR projects including cyclone
resistance housing facilities present

 Food Security, shelter and employment
are the main basis for livelihood

 No provision
allowancesforUn-employment

13 CONCLUSION
In order to improve understanding of the impact of disaster on livelihoods this research work
tried to highlights the meaning of recovery plan, program, especially livelihood recovery in acountry situation. It also describes the lesson learned from the recovery process. The
findings clearly defined that the life recovery is the main component for the survivors of thedisaster. Infrastructure reconstruction, housing, job securement, employment are prerequisite to help victims return to the self-sustainable lives they lead before the disaster. In
order to support the life recovery of the victim, it is essential to deal with multilayered support
issues covering essentially all aspects of people life, such as housing and employment,social ties, community rebuilding, economic and financial situation etc.
The findings also identified that after the formulation of Kobe City recovery plan 1000
recovery project has been implemented to sustain civic life. The Kobe Authority emphasized
housing is the basis for life recovery. But after the tenth year comprehensive recovery
assessment it was found that out of 10,000 Kobe citizen 48% answered that their situation
had gotten worsen since the earthquake, 39.3% answered that situation were the same as
before. This may happened of the special emphasis were not given for the individual
livelihood recovery. More importantly disaster affected population have overwhelmingly
identified livelihood as their greatest recovery priority. So livelihood and employment
recovery should be given highest priority in the overall recovery process
Livelihood recovery plan or guidelines are primarily considered two major issues infacilitating a more responsive sustainable livelihood recovery and protection. These are i)
Enabling livelihood protection ii) Improving livelihood promotion. In both cases strong
countermeasure act/law need to be incorporated to mitigate the sufficient need of the victims.
It is also recognized that while comparison the pre-disaster life recovery planning or postdisaster program of two region in same country or different countries there is no guaranteethat the same activity will generate similar results as the nature, magnitude, area/location,social and economic system are different from others. But there are some commonalities
across the nation with respect to recovery and reconstruction in the post-disaster era. In the
Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake 30,000 people were buried underneath debris, 80% ofthem were rescued by the local people. The people can help the people. That’s mutual help.
A single person and the government alone can not carried out the whole recovery process. It
is necessary to share the role appropriately and co-operate among citizen, community andlocal/national government. This kind of co-operation framework can be adopted by the othercountries irrespective of cultural differences. In the case of the issue of livelihood, theeffective work in the recovery process represents that the community based reconstruction
in general results in greater satisfaction for the effected community go quickly back to theirprevious activities and restart their livelihood. The community empowerment program should
be introduced during the recovery phase.

14. Recommendations
The following Japan’s experiences may be replicated in the Disaster management system of
Bangladesh: Establishment of Life Recovery Head Quarters for Shelter, Temporary/ Permanent
housing, employment, health etc after a big disaster.
 Besides the government help, mutual help, self help, neighboured help and community
help are the main components for recovery

New way of living with community business Specific Act on Support for livelihood Recovery and Disaster victims need to be
formulatedPre-disaster recovery plan need to be formulated More emphasis on life line recovery ( road and other infrastructure, housing,
employment) – a holistic approach which has direct link with livelihood recovery
 For long term recovery program life assessment is needed after five years period of timeand in this aspect the PDCA cycle can be followed.
 Workshop in grassroots level assessment
affected citizen and their livelihood options
is needed to identify the opinion of theEstablishment of Museum for the preservation of past disaster history

REFERENCES
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.

Disaster Management Bureau, Disaster Management & Relief Division, Government of
the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, 2010, National Plan for Disaster Management( 2010-2015 )UN/ISDR, 2010, Guidance Note on Recovery, LIVELIHOOD
Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, 2011, Disaster Management in Japan
UN/ISDR, 2010, Livelihood Recovery Experiences
City of Kobe, 2010, Comprehensive Strategy for Recovery from the Great HanshinAwaji Earthquake
Disaster Management Bureau, Disaster Management & Relief Division, Government of
the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, 2010, Standing Orders on Disaster
IRP,2010, International Recovery Forum 2010, “ From Resilient Recovery to
Sustainable Development
UNDP Bangladesh, PPRC, 2011, Social Safety Nets in Bangladesh
BIDS-PRP Working Paper, 2010, Safety Nets program in Bangladesh : Assessing theperformance of selected programs
UN/ISDR/IRP, 2010, Guidance Note on Recovery, Telling live Lessons
UN/ISDR/IRP, 2010, Guidance Note on Recovery, GOVERNANCE
JICA Hyogo/DRLC/KCFB,2010, “ BOKOMI” Guide Book
FAO/ILO, 2007, Disaster Livelihood Assessment Toolkit, “ Analysing and responding
to the impact of disaster on the livelihood people”
Phoenix Hyogo, 2010, “15th Anniversary of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake- A
journey of creative Reconstruction“
Government of Japan, 1998, Support for livelihood Recovery of Disaster Victims.
Office of the Disaster Relief Program, Social welfare and Relief Bureau, Ministry of
Health , Labour and welfare , 2009, The Japanese Disaster Relief Act
Kobe city, 2012, Presentation of Life Recovery from the Great Hanshin–Awaji
Earthquake.
www.ADRC.asia
www.city.kobe.ig.jp
www.dmrd.gov.bd
www.cdmp.org
www.recoveryplatform.org
www.kiur.jp
www.bousai.go.jp